Ecclesiastes

Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms

by Craig G. Bartholomew, Tremper Longman (Series Editor)

Respected Old Testament scholar Craig Bartholomew, coauthor of the well-received Drama of Scripture , provides a careful exegetical reading of Ecclesiastes in this addition to the Baker Commentary on the Old Testament Wisdom and Psalms series. Along with helpful translation and commentary, Ecclesiastes considers the theological implications of the text and its literary, historical, and grammatical dimensions. Footnotes deal with many of the technical matters, allowing readers of varying levels of interest and training to read and profit from the commentary and to engage the biblical text at an appropriate level. Pastors, teachers, and all serious students of the Bible will find here an accessible commentary that will serve as an excellent resource for their study.

Genres: Theology, Old Testament, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Christianity

448 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 2009

About the author

Craig G. Bartholomew (PhD, University of Bristol) is the H. Evan Runner Professor of Philosophy at Redeemer University College in Ancaster, Ontario, and the principal of the Paideia Centre for Public Theology. He founded the internationally recognized Scripture and Hermeneutics seminar and is coauthor of Living at the Crossroads and Christian Philosophy.

Reviews

[Trey Benfield · Rating 5 out of 5]

My favorite of the many Ecclesiastes commentaries I have read. Ecclesiastes is a complex work and is open to varying interpretations. The problem is that the author alternates between a very pessimistic view of the world that is at times dark and disturbing. However, the author of Ecclesiastes also repeatedly points out the joy in our life that come from God.

Those who study Ecclesiastes usually emphasize one or the other. Liberals emphasize the pessimistic passages treating Ecclesiastes as an iconoclast challenging traditional teachings. Conservatives emphasize the positive passages and relegate the negative ones to someone viewing the world without reference to God. The liberal approach makes Ecclesiastes incoherent and essentially banishes it from the canon. The conservative approach tames Ecclesiastes to the point of irrelevance. The problem is Ecclesiastes won't let you get away with this so easy. Both the pessimistic passages and the optimistic passages reference God's hand.

This is the strength of Batholomew's approach. He holds both views in tension in what he calls contradictory juxtaposition. The tension creates a gap for the reader that demands to be filled. The process of filling this gap is the author of Ecclesiastes' journey. It is not a journey that can be summed up in bullet points on a power point slide. It is a journey that must be experienced and felt. What you then have is an interpretation that takes the work as a whole seriously. Ecclesiastes is the work of a first rate genius and you get that sense as you read Barthlomew's commentary because Barthlomew forces you to confront the text in its entirety. He does not make it easy for anyone with preconceived ideas and I find this approach preserves the mystery and beauty of Ecclesiastes.

Although, not the most technical commentary (get Seow's commentary for the technical stuff), Bartholomew interacts with the other big commentaries (Seow, Crenshaw,Longman, Fox). He also helps Ecclesiastes engage in conversation with philosophy, other contemporary thinkers like Wendell Barry, and even psychology. The last chapter is especially helpful in this regard.

[Justice · Rating 5 out of 5]

How do I review a book that took 2 years (I started on Christmas 2023!) to read, that I filled half a notebook with notes on?

A few years ago, Ecclesiastes became a very needed anchor for my faith. Like the Teacher (or Qohelet), I was seeing a mismatch between the world around me and the faith I'd grown up with - but like Qohelet, I couldn’t let go of the beliefs of my upbringing. While my personal faith was not much shaken during that time, there was still a gap between what I saw (and what I saw many loved ones see) and what I believed. Seeing that struggle play out in the pages of the Bible, even if I didn’t fully understand the meaning of Ecclesiastes, was so powerful.

And this commentary was the perfect one do dive deeper into the book. It took an approach that I really resonated with - rather than see Ecclesiastes as fragments stitched together, it sees it as a literary whole with one author (who is dostinct from Qohelet AND the narrator) and with intentional contradictions and juxtapositions that build towards one main theme, "Remember God your creator."

This was the first commentary I've read, so I'm not sure how it compares, but I really appreciated how many other commentators were quoted, both supporting the author's point or showing a different perspective. And I found it pretty easy to sort through what was the author's arguments versus what I saw in the text versus what other scholars believed. I also was deeply moved by some of the "Theological Implications" sections and the author's ability to tie the text in with modern events, or his own perspective on faith. It definitely helped me see why this man cares so much about Ecclesiastes that he'd write a commentary this in depth.

I would highly recommend reading at least the introduction if you're curious. It's lengthy, and took me many many months to get through, but it has the overview of Ecclesiastes that I find so, so valuable.

[Andy Dollahite · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bartholomew interacts with a huge array of modern commentaries, but I was particularly grateful for his engagement with Longman (who happens to be the series editor haha). He takes a somewhat middle road view on Qohelet. He's not Solomon, he's not unorthodox (contra Longman), but he is an orthodox believer paralyzed by slipping into an autonomous epistemology. His view of "hebel" is that it means"enigma" and this obviously guides interpretation throughout. The theological perspectives at the end of each section were often fascinating, but occasionally overbaked. Still, I'd highly recommend this for someone looking for technical insight, philosophical reflection, and contemporary application.

*** I should note that the production quality of the paperback book leaves so much to be desired unless you get this at a steep discount.***

[Eric Yap · Rating 5 out of 5]

A personal favourite of three commentaries on Ecclesiastes that I was able to read through and consult. The other two are the Ecclesiastes commentary in the 1) NICOT series by Tremper Longman III and 2) Anchor Yale series by Choon-Leong Seow (Singaporean! Also best cover design I gotta give to it).

Longman is evangelical but leans critical in scholarship. The positive of the NICOT series is that it is quite succinct in its verse-by-verse layout, so it was easy to look out for a specific verse. But Longman's critical-leaning explanations, coupled with how loosely apart the verses are presented, make Ecclesiastes feel like a scrambled piece of work, with Qohelet being a confused, schizophrenia sage, all to have his conclusion upended by the frame-narrator. It was hard to find Longman's critical lens to read Qohelet convincing, or even cohesive at all, as one must question why the frame-narrator goes through so much trouble to present Qohelet's "wisdom" just to criticize it at the end (also O. Palmer Robertson's take on Longman's reading). On the other hand, Seow's commentary stands out on how detailed he is with the exegesis of the original language while being able to spot really subtle literary structures throughout the book that really helps with grasping the difficult texts. Therefore in some places, Seow actually sounded more "conservative" than Longman as he makes more sense of the text, as compared to Longman's "schizophrenia" Qohelet. However, the detail that Seow goes into with the observations on each verse might be quite laborious to read through. Did not read through Seow entirely so was unable to tell from this commentary where he leans theologically, but his association with Princeton and Vanderbilt might suggest that he belongs to the mainline tradition (pinch of salt please).

So how does Bartholomew's commentary stands out from the other two? He is similar to Longman in terms of succinct explanation, therefore not laborious like Seow and therefore beats Seow in being more readable. At the same time, being the most recently written out of the three, Bartholomew employs the subtle literary structures that Seow spots in his commentary (whenever helpful for exegesis), and therefore reads Qohelet in a much better light (less critical) and much better sense than Longman. The most salient and helpful reminder is that Bartholomew consistently situates Qohelet as a teacher in the wisdom tradition of Israel, therefore, a lot of his reading makes a lot of theological sense when read in light of other wisdom books (Proverbs), the Torah (Genesis), and the socioreligio-worship of Israel. Here truly must be the right lens to interpret Ecclesiastes as part of the canon (cues Brevard Child), if we rightly hold to Ecclesiastes as part of the inspired canon given by God: to situate it as part of the wisdom tradition of Israel, consistent with the Torah and temple worship of God.

Besides that, another highlight is how Bartholomew closes the exegesis of each pericope with an in-depth synthesis and analysis section of "theological implications." Here it really shows Bartholomew as a scholar/theologian in the Dutch Neo-Calvinist/Kuyperion tradition. While bringing out the theological motif behind Qohelet's existential quest, Bartholomew borrows and synthesizes the work of scholars from other fields (philosophy, psychology, sociology) and theologians not working directly with Ecclesiastes to enhance and strengthen, contextualize, make concrete and drive home the observations of Qohelet. Works from figures like Jacques Derrida, Wendell Berry, Carl Jung, Oliver O'Donovan, and Eugene Peterson feature prevalently in these "theological implications" sections, demonstrating that Qohelet is not the only one that stumbles upon these enigmas and joys of life through deep meditation and study (cues Bavinck antithesis and common grace). Hence making it also a reading feast akin to a sort of "intersection of theological-philosophical (et etc.) loci," contrary to modern scholarship's insistence on endless, narrow, and ultimately unhelpful specialization. At the same time, these "theological implications" sections also helpfully contextualize Qohelet's wisdom to our current zeitgeist and social-religious climate, therefore allowing the reader to follow Qohelet's existential quest closely without losing a grip on the tangible application of Qohelet's ancient wisdom to our modern life. Bartholomew also concludes Qohelet's existential quest with a postscript, detailing a fascinating overall conclusion on Ecclesiastes through its intersection and relevance against postmodernism, psychology (Jungian reading), spiritual formation, and preaching.

TLDR, if you would only pick up one commentary to ride with Qohelet, let Bartholomew be your guide.

[Jared Saltz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bartholomew writes one of the newest and most up-to-date commentary on Ecclesiastes. In general, Bartholomew understands the book to be quite late (Hellenistic), that it is (obviously!) non-Solomonic, and is written in interaction with Greek thought wedded to biblical traditions. His introduction is excellent as is his applied theory. That said, the treatment of the book was--I felt--uneven. It felt, at times (and I sympathize!) that although he understood the parts, he was not able to deal with the whole.

For those who care either way, each text is provided in translation with notes, then commentary, then an application sort of section at the end (think something like the REC or NIVACs). This was uneven, but--to be fair--that wasn't what I was reading the commentary for either way.

If you are looking for an interactive, critical, well-written commentary on the book of Ecclesiastes, this is a good one to read.

[Ciara · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is absolutely amazing! I regret not reading it sooner. As written by the wisest man that ever lived, King Solomon, it’s already guaranteed to have much reliable information. I love how he used realistic situations and actions we experience and do in our daily lives in his writing. He explained in great detail how many things we do and use that we think is useful, but is actually useless. I also enjoyed the advice he gave the youth; I can use it in the future to make wiser choices. It’s very intense as well.

[Travis Wise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wins an award for launching a comeback following one of the most boring introductions ever. Not far from 5 stars… maybe 4.4… but like many commentaries, too often falls victim to the drab genre. However, the standout: each section ends in “theological reflection”. Here, not only does Bartholomew bring all of the threads together, but he engages with voices as wide ranging as Kierkegaard, Wendell Berry, and Nietzsche. Nearly gave 5 stars just for that.

[Jared Mcnabb · Rating 3 out of 5]

Each section is broken up into “translation,” “interpretation,” which was often helpful, and “theological implication,” which was at times thought provoking. But while Barthalomew’s approach is much better than Longman’s, it still fell short of giving a coherent sense of the entire book.

[Joshua Loftin · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent commentary on Ecclesiastes that provides plenty of background on the book. It also has great sections of application and theological implications after each section of verses.

[Matthew Bonzon · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a very good commentary that I disagreed with a lot.

[Scott Cox · Rating 5 out of 5]

“For every thing there is a season,
for every matter a time under the heavens.” (Ecclesiastes 3:1)
This is by far the most interesting work I’ve read this year. Craig Bartholomew is both a philosopher (H. Runner Evan Professor of Philosophy at Redeemer University College) and Biblical exegete. As to genre, Bartholomew classifies Ecclesiastes as a “developed form of the royal testament or fictional autobiography cast in a frame narrative.” Bartholomew finds Qoholet (the preacher) on an investigative journey wherein life is fully experienced in the way of autonomous (Greek) reasoning. In so doing, Qoholet grapples with the enigmatic paradoxes of life characterized by the key word, “hebel” (futility); a word utilized 38 times in Ecclesiastes. Autonomous human reasoning lends itself to irony, “By wisdom, he (Qoholet) could not find wisdom.” This may be well expressed in David Gerrold’s humorous quip: “Life is hard. Then you die. Then they throw dirt in your face. Then the worms eat you. Be grateful it happens in that order.” Seemingly the only bright spot on this journey is found in successive carpe diem passages in which the reader is encouraged to “eat and drink, and to enjoy the good of all his labor in which he toils under the sun all the days of his life which God gives him” (Eccl. 5:18). But in the end, Bartholomew demonstrates that Qoholet’s “gap” between futility and purpose is found in remembrance of God as creator (Ecclesiastes 12:1). Sage reminder indeed! This commentary is enriched by Bartholomew’s frequent inclusion of writers (Yukio Mishima, Wendell Berry, Annie Dillard). However Bartholomew’s analysis, comparison and critique of philosophy and psychology makes this volume unique among commentaries. Although I may not agree with all of Bartholomew’s conclusions (specifically, his third century non-Solomonic authorship as well as his Jungian reading of Ecclesiastes), I found myself challenged by his analysis and fresh insights to this complex, sapiential wisdom literature. I highly recommend this commentary!

[Matt Quintana · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is all around the best commentary on Ecclesiastes available. In this outstanding contribution to the Baker Commentary on the Old Testament, Craig Bartholomew combines masterful exegesis with thoughtful and mature theological reflection. The commentary is readable and very accessible to the pastor or motivated lay-person without a knowledge of Hebrew. However, don't be fooled: Bartholomew packs major exegetical depth into this work. His overall take on the book is provocative and compelling, and his interpretation is undergirded with canonical sensitivity and theological instincts. He helpfully avoids the pitfalls of an entirely negative reading of Qohelet (contra, e.g., Longman) and does not make artificial or unfounded leaps in order to advance his interpretation of the book as a whole. If you are preaching, teaching, or studying this book, Bartholomew's commentary is a must have.

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent - a first-class commentary